On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 20:14:31 +0800 Baole Ni <[email protected]> wrote:
> I find that the developers often just specified the numeric value > when calling a macro which is defined with a parameter for access permission. > As we know, these numeric value for access permission have had the > corresponding macro, > and that using macro can improve the robustness and readability of the code, > thus, I suggest replacing the numeric parameter with the macro. > NACK! I find 0444 more readable than S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH. -- Steve > Signed-off-by: Chuansheng Liu <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <[email protected]> > --- > lib/842/842_compress.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/lib/842/842_compress.c b/lib/842/842_compress.c > index 4051339..bf45ea3 100644 > --- a/lib/842/842_compress.c > +++ b/lib/842/842_compress.c > @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ > * so that any length buffer can be compressed. > */ > static bool sw842_strict; > -module_param_named(strict, sw842_strict, bool, 0644); > +module_param_named(strict, sw842_strict, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | > S_IROTH); > > static u8 comp_ops[OPS_MAX][5] = { /* params size in bits */ > { I8, N0, N0, N0, 0x19 }, /* 8 */
